Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Original poster

97 % pass rate for A-Levels ; how did that happen?

318 replies

m1m1rie · 18/08/2006 11:20

I took my A-levels in 1989 and passed all three, and was in the minority amongst my peers. Most people failed at least one and only the really, really clever ones could achieve A-grades. Now, with so many passing and record numbers achieving A-grades how do we differentiate between those who are genuinely talented and those who are not? A girl I know has just passed 3 A-levels. She spends her days chatting on her mobile, obsessing about herself and often didn't bother going into college if she didn't feel like it. She even turned up late for one of her exams. As far as being 'clever' is concerned, she couldn't hold a conversation with you unless it was about celebrities or herself, and yet she has managed to pass all three A-levels. I am dumbstruck. I find it demeans those who do put effort into learning as they will all just be lumped in together now and treated with disdain by those who think that all kids are thick and only have A-levels because the exams are easier to pass now. Whatever is going on with the current system, it's not doing anyone any favours, it only serves to make Government stats look good.

OP posts:
VestibularProwess · 18/08/2006 11:25

Ridiculous. It's not fair on the people who really are clever or gifted or who've worked very hard to achieve good results. It makes a nonsense of the system.

GeorginaA · 18/08/2006 11:27

Same reason they're trying to get so many to university, run up huge amounts of debt only to completely devalue the degree system in the first place

So instead of being able to go into a job that requests A-levels, you have to have a degree (cos everyone has one, don't you know) and £30k worth of debt to get a job instead... mental.

expatinscotland · 18/08/2006 11:28

The academics I work with insist the exams have been dumbed down.

A bit of research into archived exams seems to give their insistence credence.

aDAdOnMumsnet · 18/08/2006 11:29

It's a joke isn't it. Haven't results got better every year for the last god knows how many years? Hmmm maybe kids are cleverer these days? Or maybe the education system just works better and better as every year goes by? Yeah right.

Agree with everything you said. The only good it does is improve government statistics.

Tinker · 18/08/2006 11:30

Isn't coursework counted towards exams now as well? Has to make them more manageable surely?

Eowyn · 18/08/2006 11:30

I managed to get a U, N & E at A level in the 80's, I bet no one could do that now.. but having seen the kids on that programme That'll Teach Them (?) who were all predicted As & could barely spell their names, I know who's the thickest. (I didn't do any work by the way, so got what I deserved).

thewomanwhothoughtshewasahat · 18/08/2006 11:32

I agree. the whole point of having qualifications at all is to enable universities and potential employers to differentiate between their candidates. if everyone passes them and if so many people get As. then why bother? they become a pointless piece of paper.

Blandmum · 18/08/2006 11:32

There are some astonishingly bright kids who get an A grade. To get and A grade you have to put in a lot of work. Not every A grade student in brilliant, but then, they never have been.

In general , to my mind, there is sligtly less academic demand in the current A levels (I teach A level Biology). Examinations are now designed to allow the student to show what they know, rather than to find out what they don't know.

Essay questions are rare and don't make up many of the marks (at least in Biology).

But you cannot damn the student for what the education system has done. Congratulations to all those students who worked hard and did well.

And as an aside all my stdents got the grades they needed to go on to tertiary education, good for them

Lilymaid · 18/08/2006 11:32

It isn't the fault of the students, though and every year their work is denigrated by the press. Some change to the system is needed at the top end? DS last year only needed to get very low marks (E or lower) in final exam in order to get an A grade in one subject.

thewomanwhothoughtshewasahat · 18/08/2006 11:33

mb I agree with "Congratulations to all those students who worked hard and did well." but the problem is - on paper you can;t tell which ones they are!

Original poster
m1m1rie · 18/08/2006 11:37

I recently read an article which compared a question from an old O-level geography paper with one from a current GCSE paper. The O-level question would have required in-depth knowledge of the subject it was addressing and an essay-type answer. The GCSE paper was more a question of ' look at this picture and fill in the missing word. The temperature is higher/lower the further you are from the sea'. All you needed to answer it correctly was eyesight.

OP posts:
twinsetandpearls · 18/08/2006 11:39

I think it does depend on the subject as well I used to teach A Level phiosophy of religion and did not see it as a dumbed down subject and my students needed to work hard and be bright to pass.

Blandmum · 18/08/2006 11:40

True, particularly at the higher grades. That said universities not get a transcript of all the marks a student gets in all the modules, do they can differentiate that way.

The thing I would most like to get rid of the is 'resit' culture. It is the kiss of death for teaching AS students who very often have the mind set of 'If I fail I can always resit'. they resit, pass that exam and fail the next, so are constantly playing catch up. They also fail to realise that they have to understand the foundation course if they are going to understand anything else!

If I had a £5 for every time I have told the kids this I wouldn't need to go to work!

Blandmum · 18/08/2006 11:40

sorry should say ''now'

Original poster
m1m1rie · 18/08/2006 11:41

It does, of course, depend on the subject. Perhaps the girl I know took A-levels in Victoria Beckham, Big Brother and Celebrity Dating Patterns. That would explain it.

OP posts:
hunkermunker · 18/08/2006 11:42

I keep trying to write something well-reasoned on this thread, but what it basically boils down to is "if the pass rate keeps going up, why are there so many thick people out there?"

Or is it a parallel universe?

Original poster
m1m1rie · 18/08/2006 11:42
Grin
OP posts:
Lilymaid · 18/08/2006 11:43

Questions from GCSE papers highlighted by the press often seem simple because they are the foundation/intermediate level questions - the higher level questions aren't of this sort and it is necessary to answer the higher level questions in order to get the higher grades. The Foundation/intermediate questions are for those not expected to achieve above a C grade.Having seen some of DS2's English Literature course work this year I think that the level of understanding expected is similar to that required for my GCE O Level back in the very dark ages.

Blandmum · 18/08/2006 11:48

But they do, even on the higher papers give condsiderably more cognitive 'promts' than they used to, at least they do in the science papers.

So for example when I did my O level in the darg ages of 1978 a standard question would be draw an label the human eye. You either knew it or you didn't Now they get the drawing and you label the layers.....so it promts you that there are, for example three layers in the eye. In my day you had to know it.

When mt cousin did a human biology O levele in the 60 one question she was asked was 'You see a sixpence on the floor and bend to pick it up. List all the muscles that you use' (and they expected you to include those in the eye.

If I gave that question to my top set kids they would have a fit!

edam · 18/08/2006 11:48

I think part of the reason is that the exam boards abandoned norm referencing. When I did my A-levels (late 80s) only a proportion were allowed to get each grade - so the top 10 per cent got A, next 15 per cent B and so on (can't recall exact percentages but along those lines). Now the pass mark for each grade is defined and doesn't vary according to how well a particular year does. So it doesn't matter whether you are in a particularly bright and hard-working peer group.

Norm referencing was unfair, but abandoning it means you can't really compare grades from before it was brought in.

I also think teenagers today work harder than we did, in general - in the 80s you could get to university with three Cs. Today it's more demanding, so people work harder to achieve the things my lot achieved without aiming so high. Which becomes a vicious circle, of course.

And exam boards seem to have changed what they demand from children, so it's easier to teach to the test, I think. When arts subjects were decided entirely on exams which consisted of lengthy essays, it was harder to just tick the right boxes.

I'm not a teacher and I don't have teenagers, so I'm not up on the details, btw.

twinsetandpearls · 18/08/2006 11:48

m1m1rie maybe there is more to this girl than you give her credit for, maybe she struggles to hold a converstaion with you as she knows how little you think of her.

My sister can come across as very much like the girl you described but is in fact a very bright young woman but because everyone assumes she is thick because of the way she looks and the fact she is interested in boys, make up etc as well as her academic studies she often plays the role. When she passed her A Levels people including her own mother said well that is becasue they are so easy. WEll no she passed them becasue she is a clever young woman who worked hard as evidenced vby the fact she is now doing extrememly well at university.

Original poster
m1m1rie · 18/08/2006 11:49

Surely, then, that in itself is unfair. Why should those expected to get lower grades get easier papers but receive the same qualification ultimately? Perhaps this is why it is so difficult to differentiate on paper who has genuinely done well?

OP posts:
Joolstoo · 18/08/2006 11:52

I think its a shame, it's this 'no-one can fail' attitude that is prevalent these days. Kids intelligence today is no different to those kids from the 50's 60's 70's whatever. What is different is the way they are taught and the exam.

Multiple choice questions
Coursework
Use of the internet permitted (open to all sorts of abuse as discussed on the News yesterday)

When I were a lass you had to know forumulas, quotations and the idea that you took calculators, and notes into an examine was laughable.

Original poster
m1m1rie · 18/08/2006 11:53

Twinset, trust me. I am the last person on earth to judge someone on how they look. Quite the contrary, I am of the belief that why do you have to look like a hatchet-faced bluestocking to be taken seriously? I too am as interested as the next person in the frivolities of life. This girl, however, would never be so self-conscious as to disguise an intellect. If she does, I suspect an application to RADA may be in order.

OP posts:
hunkermunker · 18/08/2006 11:54

When I did GCSE Maths (I think this is right) there were four papers - the bottom set took the bottom two papers, the middle set took the middle two and the top set took the top two (ie the hardest ones).

I remember photocopying past papers for the bottom set to use - and farking hell they were a piece of piss - 10+2 and allowed to use calculators kinda thing (although you could just've taken your shoes and socks off, surely?).

I'm not a teacher for a good reason, btw I'd be shit at it.